Not really. There's nothing wrong with ranks as long as they have nothing =
to do with the meanings of names. And what makes you think that the =
ranks in the organization of the PhyloCode are absolute? It would hardly =
compromise the PhyloCode if the Articles were called Rules, the Sections =
called Chapters, etc. Sorry about the nit picking, but it's been a long =
day. =20
>>> "T. Mike Keesey" <tmk@dinosauricon.com> - 10/5/00 7:39 PM >>>
I was just looking at the PhyloCode Table of Contents when I was suddenly
struck by how it's organized: Articles within Sections within Chapters
within Divisions ... kind of against the spirit of taxonomy without
absolute ranks, isn't it? :)
Sorry --
___________________________________________________________________________=
__
T. MICHAEL KEESEY
Home Page <http://dinosauricon.com/keesey>
The Dinosauricon <http://dinosauricon.com>
personal <keesey@bigfoot.com> --> <tmk@dinosauricon.com>
work, binary files <mkeesey@dcentgroup.com>
Dinosauricon-related <dinosaur@dinosauricon.com>
AOL Instant Messenger <Ric Blayze>
ICQ <77314901>
Yahoo! Messenger <Mighty Odinn>